R.S.C. v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

R.S.C. v. State

157 So. 3d 541, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 2455, 2015 WL 735697

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 23, 2015

DocketNo. 1D14-4180

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 157 So. 3d 541 (R.S.C. v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

R.S.C. v. State, 157 So. 3d 541, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 2455, 2015 WL 735697 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant pled guilty to two misdemean- or drug offenses. The trial court adjudicated Appellant delinquent and sentenced him to a “non-secure residential” program. We affirm the adjudication of delinquency, but reverse the disposition order because, as the State properly concedes, the trial court erred in sentencing Appellant to a non-secure residential program without making the required written findings. See § 985.441(2)(d), Fla. Stat. (2012) (authorizing the trial court to commit a child whose offense is a misdemeanor to a non-secure residential placement if the court makes written findings that “the protection of the public requires such placement or that the particular needs of the child would be best served by such placement”). We remand for the trial court to make written findings to support its placement decision, or if it is unable to do so, to resentence Appellant. See P.W. v. State, 135 So.3d 583 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); K.M.H. v. State, 91 So.3d 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).

AFFIRMED in part: REVERSED in part: REMANDED with directions.

PADOVANO, WETHERELL, and BILBREY, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Appellant pled guilty to two misdemean- or drug offenses. The trial court adjudicated Appellant delinquent and sentenced him to a “non-secure residential” program. We affirm the adjudication of delinquency, but reverse the disposition order because, as the State properly concedes, the trial court erred in sentencing Appellant to a non-secure residential program without making the required written findings. See § 985.441(2)(d), Fla. Stat. (2012) (authorizing the trial court to commit a child whose offense is a misdemeanor to a non-secure residential placement if the court makes written findings that “the protection of the public requires such placement or that the particular needs of the child would be best served by such placement”). We remand for the trial court to make written findings to support its placement decision, or if it is unable to do so, to resentence Appellant. See P.W. v. State, 135 So.3d 583 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014); K.M.H. v. State, 91 So.3d 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012).

AFFIRMED in part: REVERSED in part: REMANDED with directions.

PADOVANO, WETHERELL, and BILBREY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

157 So. 3d 541, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 2455, 2015 WL 735697, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rsc-v-state-fladistctapp-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack